..the production/consumption paradigm here strikes me as trying to answer a quantum question with Newtonian equations..
-
-
-
..Not targeted at the right level of abstraction to give a helpful answer..
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Monkey teleology is a bitch to kick.
-
"It would be vast, incredibly efficient, and utterly pointless." - If it's not for the monkeys, what on earth could it be for?
-
SA is intuiting a derivatives market, with human consumption as the underlying. Well, that is one possible end point.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Interesting point to me is the assumption on both sides that only narratively interesting things have moral value.
-
That is, Scott's and Hanson's sides. Land seems to be, how to say, Leviathanist, gives value to desire-without-will as well.
-
Past the immediate scope of human survival, I seriously question mine or anyone's conceptions of value. Too many blind spots
-
I don't think "human survival" is a useful value statement either, in all central cases is implicit and in edge cases useless.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.